Shel Belinkoff wrote:
>
> > The interesting aspect of Mike's post
> > is that he's an avowed and
> > accomplished darkroom freak who really
> > seems to like the output he gets
> > from a middle of the road digital camera.
>
> Since I've never seen Mike's prints, and don't know what he considers
> a quality print to be, I can't get too excited when he says that the
> prints he gets from this camera and his post-exposure setup is of
> excellent quality. Being an "avowed darkroom freak" doesn't mean that
> one's capable of producing high quality work. And, just to be clear
> on this, I'm not suggesting that Mike's work is of poor quality, it's
> just that none of us (to the best of my knowledge) has seen any of his
> photography.
Well, this is probably true. I guess I'm making an assumption. However,
it's based on the fact that he's run a b+w lab, edited a darkroom
magazine, looked at thousands of prints that were all assumed by their
submitters to be their best work, and has publicly stated he's a very
good printer.
I guess he could have faked his way this far, but I'll give him the
benefit of the doubt.
Btw, we're talking about print quality, not whether he takes good or
interesting photos.
tv
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
